Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • In answer to your questions yes even though it wasn't called that, it was the NTK. Had it been a windscreen ticket you would not have received the NTK until 28 days had elapsed. In earlier times if the warden was present then a windscreen ticket would have been issued. It nows seems that the DVLA and the Courts don't see a problem  with not issuing a ticket when a warden is on site. A period of parking must mean that ther e has to be a start time and a finish time in order for it to be considered a period. A single time does not constitute a period. I am not sure what you mean by saying it could be taken either way.  All they have mentioned is  the incident time which is insufficient. There are times on the photos about one minute apart which do not qualify as the parking period because they are not on the PCN itself. The reason I asked if the were any more photos is that you should be allowed 5 minutes Consideration period for you to read the signs and decide whether you want to accept them and you do that by staying longer than 5 minutes. if  more  do not have photos of your staying there for more than 5 minutes they are stuffed. You cannot say that you left within the 5 minute period if you didn't , but you can ask them, should it get to Court , to provide strict proof that you stayed longer than the statutory time. If they can't do that, case over.
    • I recently bought some trainers from Sports Direct and was unhappy with them and their extortionate delivery and return postage charges. I tweeted about being unhappy, and received a reply from someone claiming to be from Sports Direct asking me to send my order number and email address by pm, so a claim could be raised. Which I (stupidly) did. The account used Sports Direct's name and branding, and a blue tick.  The following day I received a call from "Sports Direct Customer Service", and with a Kenyan number. They asked for details of the issue, and then sent me an email with a request to install an app called Remitly. They provided me with a password to access the app then I saw that it had been setup for me to transfer £100, and I was asked to enter my credit card number so they could "refund" me. I told them I was uncomfortable with this (to say the least), and was just told to ring them back when I did feel comfortable doing it. Ain't never gonna happen.  I just checked my X account, and the account that sent the message asking for my details is gone. I feel like a complete idiot falling for what was a clear scam. But at least I realised before any real damage was done. if you make a complaint about a company on social media, and you get a reply from someone claiming to be from that company and asking for personal details, tread very carefully.   
    • The good news is that their PCN does not comply with the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012  Schedule 4.. First under Section 9 (2)The notice must— (a)specify the vehicle, the relevant land on which it was parked and the period of parking to which the notice relates; (b)inform the keeper that the driver is required to pay parking charges in respect of the specified period of parking and that the parking charges have not been paid in full; The PCN does not specify the parking period. AS you rightly say the ANPR times do not include driving to the parking space and then from there back to the exit. And once you include getting children in and out of cars especially if seat belts are involved the time spent parked can be a fair bit less than the ANPR times but still probably nowhere near the time you spent. But that doesn't matter -it's the fact that they failed to comply. Also they failed to ask the keeper to pay the charge.  Their failure means that they cannot now transfer the charge from the diver to the keeper . Only the driver is now liable. As long as UKPA do not know who was driving it will be difficult for them to win in Court as the Courts do not accept that the driver and the keeper are the same person. Particularly as anyone can drive any car if they have the correct insurance. It might be able to get more reasons to contest the PCN if you could get some photos of the signs. both at the entrance and inside the car park. the photos need to be legible and if there are signs that say different things from others that would also be a help.
    • Farage rails and whines about not being allowed on the BBC ... ... but pulls out at the last minute of a BBC Panorama interview special. It was denied it was anything to do with his candidates being outed as misogynists and Putin apologists, or that farage was afraid Nick Robinson might throw some difficult questions at him ... despite farages recent practice at quickly cowering in fear.   It was claimed 'it wasn't in Nigels diary'     Nigel Farage pulls out of BBC interview at last minute amid Hitler row WWW.INDEPENDENT.CO.UK ‘Panorama’ special postponed as Reform UK party faces row over candidate who claimed UK would have been ‘better off’ if it had...   Waaahhhh
    • i'd say put lowells to strict proof of where the payment came from. cant hurt to send SB letter, even if proved not. at least they get your correct address. they'd have to link the old IVA times scale to a payment  these IVA F&F pots (if thats where it came from) most mugs dont even know they are not only taking most of your payments on fees but also creaming money off to supposedly offer F&F's.  funny when the IVA fails or is complete these sums of money in F&F pots never get given back or even mentions... these IVA firm directors esp with regard to knightsbridge and creditfix were fined and struck off more times than Paul Burdell of Link Fame and still managed to continue to scam people.
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
        • Thanks
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

1st credit


rooferboy03
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5585 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 54
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Hi all

Papers have been sworn in so i guess it's a waiting game to wait for a set aside hearing date.

Since receiving the SD !st credit kept ringing me constantly for about 10 days but they have not now phoned for at least a week. Do you think they were waiting to see if i would apply for a set aside or just hoping that i would'nt so they could then petition me for bankruptcy.

Any thoughts much appreciated.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Give the court a call every week RB, to check when the hearing will be....and don't forget to do your research, and submit costs in 24 hours before the hearing !!.....if you do happen to pick the phone up by accident to them, and they ask about the SD, just say that you will allow them to discontinue if they pay your costs !!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Because they might write to you seeing that you have solid grounds to set aside and lose their bottle !! But if the judge goes ahead with a hearing, then if it was me i'd ignore what 1st Credit say (unless they commit to paying your costs) and appear in court to show the judge how disgusted I was at them abusing the insolvency service !!

Link to post
Share on other sites

It is a clear abuse of the insolvency process if the debt is disputed to issue a stat demand

 

they know this is the case and yet they still issue them

 

i bet the person named on the demand is not contactable as well which goes against Rule 6.2 Insolvency rules 1986

Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with Paul....you try and ring Mr Silcock and you will never get through....

 

statutory demand must show a named person or persons from the Creditor or their agent/solicitor whom you can contact directly. This is Rule 6.2 of The insolvency Rules 1986.

This means that if the statutory demand doesn't give the name of a person you can speak to then it is not valid. If you try to contact the named person and they won’t put you through then it is also invalid

Link to post
Share on other sites

Why did the judge I have in my set aside, not understand anything, should I have taken my complaint further, as my debt was clearly in dispute and she wouldn't listen to me. Just to warn Rooferboy that not every court awards costs and not all judges will award the costs???? But ask anyway...........:):)

LilythePink

If you liked what I said, and if it helped in any way, please tip my scales..... thank you:)

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Remember to get your costs into the court 24 hours before the hearing either by fax or guranteed delivery sent 48 hours pervious...

 

Use a sheet of paper entitled LITIGANT IN PERSON COSTS

 

Or use this sheet kindly provided by X20 BUT edit it to say LITIGANT IN PERSON COSTS

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/dca-legal-successes/156641-capquest-statutory-demand-help-4.html

 

You can claim £9.25 per hour (for example 10 hours of research into the Consumer Credit Act and Insolvency Act

Mileage at 40p per mile

Parking

Postage

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Hi All

I am a bit dismayed about the outcome of my set aside hearing as it did not go well.

The Judge dismissed my case entirely basicall saying you owe it you pay it.

He was not interested in any points of law or anything else i had to say.

He did however produce paperwork from the other side that they downloaded from this site, specifically information given out by 42man.

He then said that all i had done was copied my affidavit from the internet and he was not impressed.

I told him that i did seek help from the forum and that my affidavit was my own creation from my research into the site.

They have still not produced a cca, but does this really matter now as it seems they have been given the green light by the judge to do what ever they like.

At this time i am very dispondent and am just waiting to see what evil trickery they come up with next

Thanks RB

Link to post
Share on other sites

County court judges should abide by HIGH COURT case law... -

 

THE WILSON CASE MADE IT CLEAR THAT IN THE EVENT OF NO ACCEPTABLE CONSUMER CREDIT AGREEMENT THEN THE CREDITOR COULD NOT RECOVER MONIES OWED UNDER ORDINARY CONTRACT LAW REGARDLESS OF WHETHER THEY COULD PROVE THE DEBT EXISTED OR NOT – THIS WAS THE DECISION OF THE HOUSE OF LORDS AND SHOULD THEREFORE BE BINDING IN THIS COURT

Link to post
Share on other sites

I know it sounds incredible does'nt it.

I even stated about the way in which they served the SD and his reply was it doen'nt matter how they served it the fact is they have.

He said i had no grounds to show that the sd should be set aside.

I am obviously now just waiting for the leeches to make their next move and see what happens RB

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry Rooferboy, my judge was awful too, completely believed the other side, and wouldn't let me put my side.

As in criminal courts, can we not appeal a decision, or go to a higher court???? Just an idea, as this happens in the criminal courts, they appeal it if they don't like the decision.....

I am really annoyed for rooferboy, and it just reminds me of my own case.

 

Lily

LilythePink

If you liked what I said, and if it helped in any way, please tip my scales..... thank you:)

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

I would suggest reporting to the OFT...it is staggering enough that this was not set aside, but one other cagger had the same experience and is NOT happy...but is seeing it through... - http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/general-debt-issues/170237-citifinancial-1st-credit-sd.html?highlight=digitalburnout

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...